"Whatever the reason, it appears that there are only two ways to go
about being female these days: You are either a midriff-bearing,
gum-snapping, engagement ring-chasing girly girl or you are a probable
lesbian.
We used to think of this dichotomy in terms of
"separating the women from the girls." Perhaps you remember how this
went. Teenagers and early twentysomethings wore nameplate necklaces and
waited for the phone to ring, and adult women owned condos and knew how
to unclog a toilet without losing their sex appeal.
But in a
culture that's as allergic to subtlety as it is obsessed with youth,
acceptable versions of womanhood seem to be melting away with the polar
ice cap. You either get the Botox, the boob job, the bikini wax and
baby doll dresses, or you take the radical step of looking and acting
like a fully formed, grown-up female.
Once upon a time, these
fully formed creatures were called "real women." Now they're called
lesbians. This is especially true in cases in which the women in
question are not known to actually be lesbians. What do Hillary
Rodham Clinton, Condoleezza Rice, Christiane Amanpour, Oprah Winfrey
and Martha Stewart have in common? It's not that they're accomplished,
independent, talented, ambitious or rich, it's that they're all
secretly gay! Ask anyone who reads Internet blogs.
I'm allowed
to say this because I'm secretly gay too. Or at least I try to be. What
choice do I have? Apparently "lesbian" is now the de facto label for
any woman who asserts her own tastes and opinions and does not
necessarily need to get married tomorrow. Granted, this might be
confusing for people who lack opinions and their own tastes, and are
desperate to settle down, but happen to be actual lesbians. But,
according to the current cultural mind-set, a heterosexual woman who
has her act together simply does not exist in nature."
Post a comment
Your Information
(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)
Comments